Allahabad High Court
Shivbaran vs State Of U.P. on 4 April, 2022
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3028 of 2022 Applicant :- Shivbaran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Vipul Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Ashish Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned AGA for State.
2. This bail application has been filed by applicant, Shivbaran seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.50 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act, Police Station Tindawari, District Banda, during the pendency of trial.
3. Perused the record.
4. It transpires from record that marriage of Bhupendra Vishwakarma son of applicant was solemnized with Phoola Devi (deceased) on 27.05.2015. Unfortunately on 31.03.2021 Phoola Devi, daughter-in-law of the applicant died as she committed suicide by hanging herself. The information regarding aforesaid incident was given by the applicant himself at the concerned police station on 31.03.2021. Same is explicit from annexure-1 to the bail application. Subsequent to aforesaid information, inquest (panchayatnama) of the body of the deceased was conducted on 31.03.2021 itself. In the opinion of witnesses of inquest (panch witnesses), nature of death of deceased was characterized as suicidal. Thereafter, the postmortem of the body of the deceased was conducted on the same day. In the opinion of the autopsy surgeon, cause of death of the deceased was asphyxia due to antemortem hanging. Except for the ligature mark, autopsy surgeon did not find any other injury on the body of the deceased.
5. After aforesaid exercise had been undertaken, a delayed FIR dated 07.04.2021 was lodged by Smt. Sampatiya (mother of the deceased) and was registered as Case Crime No.0050 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 DP Act, Police Station Tindawari, District Banda. In the aforesaid FIR five persons namely, Bhupendra (husband), Shivbaran (father-in-law), Bholu (devar), Chhotu (devar) and Smt. Shivkumari (mother-in-law) - of the deceased, have been nominated as named accused.
6. The gravamen of the allegations made in the FIR is to the effect that marriage of daughter of the first informant was solemnized with Bhupendra Vishwakarma on 27.05.2015. However, in-laws of the daughter of the first informant were dissatisfied with the goods and dowry given at the time of marriage. Additional demand of dowry by way of motorcycle and a gold chain was continuously made. Subsequently daughter of the first informant came in family way and it was thus presumed that everything shall be alright. However, irrespective of above, physical cruelty was committed upon the daughter of the first informant. In November, 2020 a panchayat was held and it was agreed that daughter of the first informant shall not be subjected to cruelty. However, irrespective of the same, commission of physical and mental cruelty upon the daughter of the first informant continued uninterrupted. Ultimately, on 31.03.2021 the named accused with a common object cause the death of the daughter of the first informant by hanging her.
7. After registration of the aforementioned FIR, investigating officer proceeded with statutory investigation of aforementioned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII CrPC. He examined the first informant and other witnesses under Section 161 CrPC.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that applicant is the father-in-law of the deceased. He is a named accused. However, he is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in aforementioned case crime number.
9. It is then contended that the deceased was a short tempered lady and she had taken the extreme step of committing suicide by hanging herself. However, bona fide of the applicant is explicit from the fact that except for the ligature mark, no other internal or external antemortem injury was found on body of the deceased. Allegations made in the FIR with regard to demand of additional dowry and commission of physical and mental cruelty upon the deceased are false and concocted. Same have been engineered for the purpose of the present criminal proceedings. It is an admitted fact that marriage of son of applicant was solemnized with deceased more than six years ago from the date of occurrence. However neither any complaint was made nor any criminal proceedings were ever initiated against the applicant or other in-laws regarding demand of additional dowry or commission of physical and mental cruelty upon the deceased on account of non-fulfilment of additional demand of dowry. Further more, applicant cannot be said to be the beneficiary of the alleged demand of dowry. Applicant is an old man.
10. Learned counsel for applicant has then invited attention of the Court to the memo of partition, copy of which has been brought on record as annexure-6 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. On the basis of above, he submits that partition had taken place in between the applicant and his son by leaps and bounds. As such, applicant has no concern with the family life of the husband of the deceased. It is thus urged that there is no such material on the record on the basis of which it can be definitely concluded that applicant has abetted in the commission of alleged crime. It is then contended that applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 07.05.2021, as such, he has undergone more than 11 months of incarceration. In case applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.
11. Per contra, the learned AGA has opposed the application for bail. He contends that since the applicant is not only a named but also a chargesheeted accused, no indulgence be granted in his favour by this Court. However, he could not dispute the factual and legal submissions urged by learned counsel for the applicant.
12. Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State, upon consideration of evidence on record, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.
13. Accordingly, present bail application is allowed.
14. Let the applicant, Shivbaran involved in aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) Applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence.
(ii) Applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) Applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) Applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
15. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant and send him to prison.
Order Date :- 4.4.2022 Shahroz